Risky business
Funding agencies should highlight their roles as risk managers to underpin public trust.
Send us a link
Impact, not impact factor
The scientific community must not rely exclusively on the impact factors of journals.
Emerging trends in peer review: a survey
"Classical peer review" has been subject to intense criticism for slowing down the publication process, bias against specific categories of paper and author, unreliability, inability to detect errors and fraud, unethical practices, and the lack of recognition for unpaid reviewers. This paper surveys innovative forms of peer review that attempt to address these issues.
Incidence of data duplications in a randomly selected pool of Life Sciences
This study questions the reliability of life science literature, it illustrates that data duplications are widespread and independent of journal impact factor and call for a reform of the current peer review and retraction process of scientific publishing.
A human right to citizen science
The flourishing of citizen science is an exciting phenomenon with the potential to contribute significantly to scientific progress. However, we lack a framework for addressing in a principled and effective manner the pressing ethical questions it raises. We argue that at the core of any such framework must be the human right to science.
2014 Journal Impact Factors
This year, 272 journals will receive their first Impact Factor. The JCR will also suppress 39 titles –29 for high rates of self-citation and 10 for “citation stacking”.
HEFCE, Elsevier, the "copy request" button, and the future of open access
How does the future for open access look?
The Mozilla Fellowship for Science
Are you a champion of open science and open data? Mozilla is seeking researchers eager to advance openness in science and data within their institutions.
Science chief wants to work ERC magic on innovation
Carlos Moedas has proposed setting up a European Innovation Council to fund applied research and innovation.
French scientists welcome new research minister
Thierry Mandon replaces Geneviève Fioraso, who stepped down in March for health reasons, leaving France without anyone heading the research brief for three months.
'Export rules' threaten research
The US government is considering policy changes that could dramatically affect how researchers handle equipment and information that have national-security implications. Scientists would need to reconsider what they can discuss with graduate students from other countries, or when traveling abroad on work trips.
National ORCID implementation launched
Italy will be implementing ORCID on a national scale. 70 universities and 4 research centers will initially participate in the consortium.
National consortium for ORCID set to improve UK research visibility and collaboration
ORCID will now be offered to UK higher education institutions through a national consortium arrangement operated by Jisc.
Queen Mary University of London considers making PhD students employees
Importance of doctoral candidates in research makes it likely that many institutions will make the change, says principal.
Election results delight scientists
Election results delight scientists
Researchers hope that a more pluralistic parliament will put an end to interference and slipping standards.
Undue burdens
Proposed controls on foreign operations in China are a threat to scientific collaboration.
Explosive intervention set to transform climate change debate
Explosive intervention set to transform climate change debate
Pope Francis squarely blames the burning of fossil fuels for climate change in the leaked draft of his long-awaited environmental encyclical.
Brexit and science: let's not make the same mistake as the Swiss
What lessons does the Swiss ambivalence towards European Union hold for the UK?
Funders must encourage scientists to share
To realize the full potential of large data sets, researchers must agree on better ways to pass data around, says Martin Bobrow.
Wondering if I'm the next Tim Hunt
Would we worry a little more about academic freedom—about his right to hold an unpopular view and still be a member of the academic community?
Retraction of scientific papers for fraud or bias is just the tip of the iceberg
Investigating fraud is hard work, and it is easier for journal editors to ignore the problem and perpetuate the myth that peer review of trial reports ensures their scientific quality.
The web will either kill science journals or save them
Scientific research is awesome-we read it, we build upon it, we innovate with it, and we love it. But the process of getting research from the scientists who spend months or years with their data to the academics who want to read it can be messy.
The Retraction Watch Leaderboard
Who has the most retractions? Here's the Retraction Watch list.
Paper disputes causes of research misconduct
Productive researchers with high-impact papers and those working in countries were the pressure to publish is intense are less likely to produce retracted papers and are more likely to correct them.
Five companies control more than half of academic publishing
[3]A study at the University of Montreal shows that Reed-Elsevier, Springer, Wiley-Blackwell, Taylor & Francis, and Sage now publish more than 50% of all academic articles. This number has been rising, thanks to mergers and acquisitions, from 30% in 1996 and only 20% in 1973.
Irreproducible biology research costs put at $28 billion per year
Study calculates cost of flawed biomedical research in the US.
Examining the predictive validity of NIH peer review scores
"Retrospective analyses of the correlation between percentile scores from peer review and bibliometric indices of the publications resulting from funded grant applications are not valid tests of the predictive validity of peer review at the NIH."
×